Sunday, August 30, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
President George H. W. Bush On Americas Diversity
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
A Review of Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny"
The number one best-selling non-fiction hard-back book in the United States at the time of this review is Mark Levin's 'Liberty and Tyranny' (Threshold Editions/Simon and Schuster). Its subtitle says it all: 'A Conservative Manifesto'. This book consists of just 245 pages including its 38 pages of notes--yet, it contains more knowledge of current politics and the relevant economic and historical knowledge than any other book one is likely to find out there in the waste land of American popular non-fiction today. It is also a philosophical work--and probably the most important American philosophical work to be published since Ayn Rand's philosophical novel 'Atlas Shrugged' (1957).
Mark Levin is "huge fan" of Ayn Rand, and so it is fitting that sales of 'Atlas Shrugged' have also dramatically surged upward since our current Presidential Administration got elected into office in November of 2008. 'Liberty and Tyranny' was begun, and most of it written, at least 18 months before it was released for mass consumption on March 23rd, 2009. So, much of this book proves prescient. The Conservative manifesto of 'Liberty and Tyranny' must be scaring the hell out of the Liberals, the Democrats, and the RINOs--those who seek to give us Hell on Earth for our lives (but not for theirs). These are times which try people's souls; this book is a bright and burning lantern in the darkness, which explains its huge sales. If enough people read and understand this book, the mad Libs will be in more trouble than they have been since 1980.
The great power of 'Liberty and Tyranny' lies in the fact that it centers entirely around ageless, timeless principles--the principles which manifest Conservative thought and deed. No Liberal has any principles; all that citizen Liberals want is for the government to guarantee that nobody can be "better" than they are, and all that Liberal politicians want is power, as much power as they can possibly have over everyone else's lives. There are no principles in their views--only fear and power-lust, nothing more.
Mark Levin lays out in exquisite detail and clear, concise, consistent prose precisely where Conservative principles have their origins, the objective evidence for why they work, and their historical precedents. He actually does not call the Liberals by that name throughout most of the book, as that label has historically been applied in different ways and could cause some confusion; instead, he calls them "Statists": those who worship government and/or work in the government who want to expand its power relentlessly and, in truth, infinitely.
Conservatism is what gives us liberty; Statism is what puts us under the iron fist of tyranny. Conservatism has precious little to do with what the Statist makes so many gullible Americans of all classes believe it does. Levin proves this premise true over and over and over again, whether writing about the need to read the Constitution as it was written and derive its original meanings and intents from historical context and extratextual letters, journals, and notes written by the Founders; or the insipid evil of mad Liberal science on issues like the spurious grounds for banning of DDT and the massive man-made global warming fraud; or the evil of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid; or the need for the federal government to do just the one thing that it was ever supposed to do: preserve the American civil society.
'Liberty and 'Tyranny' tells us that "so distant is America today from its founding principles that it is difficult to precisely describe the nature of American government." Levin also reminds us that President Ronald Reagan said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction". The book ends with the epilogue of "A Conservative Manifesto" and lays out a 10-point call-to-action plan that all need to hear in these dark days.
Read Mark Levin's 'Liberty and Tyranny'. Meaningfully mark it up. Read it over again. Read it slowly. Give it to your children and grandchildren as presents--and when you do, put a little sticky note on the cover saying, "I'm sorry for what I've done to you."
You can find Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny" at the conservative books section at AmericanConservative Values. |  |
Friday, August 21, 2009
You Decide What Life is Like in U.S.A.
Know how it works? Know how it supposed to work? Know who they are? Vote in the right people to fix it. Get the facts. http://politicalfirestorm.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
The Ex-Presidents of the United States of America - George Bush the Elder, Part One
George Hebert Walker Bush was in Milton, Massachusetts on 12 June, 1924. His father, Prescott Bush was a managing partner in a Wall Street investment firm and was a US senator for Connecticut from 1952 to 1962. His mother Dorothy Walker Bush was the daughter of another prominent Wall Street investment banker, George Herbert Walker and the founder of the international golfer competition, the Walker Cup.
Bush attended the Greenwich Country Day School and Phillip Academy, both exclusive private schools, where he was a model student, both in the classroom and the athletic field. Following the attack on Pearl Harbour, Bush enlisted in the US Navy, receiving a commission as an ensign in the US Naval Reserve, he was the youngest naval aviator to that date. He saw action in the Pacific, serving on the USS San Jacinto, he was involved in attacks against Japanese installations on Chichijima. During the attack, Bush's aircraft was hit by flak, forcing him to bail out, he was adrift on a raft for four hours before been rescued by the lifeguard submarine USS Finback. He later returned to the San Jacinto and participated in operations in the Philippines.
Through 1944, he flew fifty-eight combat missions, for which he received the Distinguished Flying Cross, three Air Medals and the Presidential Unit Citation awarded to the San Jacinto. On his return from the war, he married his fiancée Barbara Pierce and took his place that he had gained prior to the war in Yale University, he joined an accelerated programme, graduating with a degree in economics within three years. He also captained the Yale baseball team and competed in two College World Series.
Russell Shortt is a travel consultant with Exploring Ireland, the leading specialists in customised, private escorted tours, escorted coach tours and independent self drive tours of Ireland. Article source Russell Shortt, http://www.exploringireland.net - http://www.visitscotlandtours.com |
Friday, August 14, 2009
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out on Abortion
In 1983, President Reagan wrote an essay for the "Human Life Review" entitled, "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation." This brief writing of his pro-life philosophy was published in book form a year later. It was expanded to approximately to 95 pages with lengthy afterwords by Surgeon General C. Everett Koop and British essayist Malcolm Muggeridge. Reagan's brief composition is probably one of the better well-argued pro-life essays ever written. It is also significant as it was the first ever by a sitting President. It was President Reagan's attempt to awaken a nation to the implications of abortion. In this short book, President Reagan gives an account on how important the issue of abortion is to the "conscience of a nation."
President Reagan's essay is only 26 pages of the book, but it is well structured. He believed that diminishing the life of the unborn diminishes the value of all human life. He tackled the pro-abortion "quality of life" argument and compared it to the Dred Scott slavery issue. Reagan likened the pro-abortion argument to slavery and drew parallels between the Roe vs. Wade decision and the Dred Scot decision that divided America over a century earlier. According to Reagan, the quality of life argument is an argument for quality control of the population.
Reagan surmises that legalized abortion is a very slippery slope. He says that unborn babies are being killed because they are simply not wanted or come at an inconvenient time. He also states that many are killed because they will be unable to lead a "normal" life as the result of birth defects. Such babies are considered to be of less value and thus denied human rights. He claims this denial of human rights is accomplished by activist judges who frame the interpretation of the US Constitution through the lens of their own pro-abortion beliefs.
Reagan believes that the arbitrary evaluation of unborn lives must stop. He states that this philosophy will lead to further the crimes of infanticide and illustrates this by citing the Indiana case of "Baby Doe." Baby Doe was allowed to starve to death because the child had Down's syndrome. The essence of Reagan's argument is that no nation can survive and prosper when a group of individuals look at a child and declare whether that child has value as a human being. Reagan goes on to say, "Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning."
The pro-life movement will not be disappointed with Reagan's essay, and will conclude that it contains very powerful and logical anti-abortion arguments.
Johnny Kicklighter is a charter contributor to the Mosaic Pregnancy & Health Centers, (formerly the New Beginnings Pregnancy Care Center) Fairview Heights, Illinois. Johnny is also an instructor and counselor at the Gateway Biblical Counseling and Training Center. |
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
James Madison and the Bill of Rights Today
It struck me recently that often times the most important things seem so obvious to us that we take it for granted that they are uniformly understood by all. Such was the case for the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Had it not been for the efforts of James Madison, the Bill of Rights may not exist today. Most congressmen during Madison's time thought the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights to be understood and, therefore, it was unnecessary to add them to the Constitution of the United States. And yet today, with the clarity of hindsight, we see how important it was to have them written down. And yet with as good a job as our founding fathers have done in creating the Constitution, the left wing radicals in this country have succeeded in finding the chinks in our armor and exploiting them.
As with the word "marriage" used, but not defined, in the Constitution of the State of Massachusetts, if not written down explicitly, the definition is prone to distortion. Men can and do stretch the truth to suit their own purposes. Two hundred and fifty years ago it was understood that marriage is a contract between a man and a woman. Today, we deny the difference between men and women, just as we deny that a fetus is a human life.
The change in the definition of marriage in a few states is not the first assault on the moral base of this country as reflected in the Bill of Rights. Our freedom of religion and freedom of speech have been under attack in this country for the past 60 years. Every effort has been made to suppress religious speech in our schools and public places. Atheists are attempting to remove any reference to God from all public forums. The Democratic congress continually threatens to use FCC rules such as the Fairness Doctrine to suppress free speech rather than protect it. On August 6, 2009, four Service Employees International Union (SEIU) (A union with a large healthcare worker membership) members assaulted Mr. Kenneth Gladney for selling "Don't Tread on Me" merchandise outside of a town hall meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, where the subject under discussion was the proposed health care bill. The Administration is collecting e-mail and web addresses from "snitches" under the pretence of wanting to correct misinformation about the health care bill. These are all infringements on our first amend right of free speech.
The Obama administration has also set its sights on gun regulation, as if the prohibition of guns within city limits was not enough of an assault on the second amendment. It may seem unthinkable, but the time may come when we may have to defend ourselves from our own government. And without guns, the citizenry becomes the servant to the government rather than the master.
After re-reading the Bill of Rights, I ask is it not now the time to come to its defense. As James Madison stated, "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." Be careful America, the slope is getting steeper and soon we may be at the point of no return.
Joseph L. Conigliaro
Sunday, August 9, 2009
The Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make now law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or thing to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on the presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or navel forces, or in the militia, where in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of live, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witness in his favor, and to have assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars,. The right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration of the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage other retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United State by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Discover the Truth about the Republican Party
Does the Republican Party really stand for Republican Principals? What are republican principals? Find out more: http://historyofrepublicanparty.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Notre Dame's Knute Rockne's Analysis Applies to GOP
Legendary Notre Dame college football coach Knute Rockne once said, "It isn't necessary to see a good tackle. You can hear it."
He was referring to the fact that - if executed properly - the sheer crackling noise from the "hit" on the opposing player will tell coaches all they need to know about the play.
The same is true in politics. It is not necessary to see or understand a good political strategy - the end result will speak for itself on election day. Everything else will be "woulda, shoulda, coulda."
While President Obama continues to go about the business of governing the nation - the 2008 vanquished Republican Presidential candidates are busy plotting their political strategies with hopes of making Mr. Obama a one-term President.
Like it or not - this is our political process at work and it has been gong on for the last 50 years. While there is a strong possibility that a fresh GOP face will surface and win the hearts of the Republican Party in 2012, history tells us that the standard bearer will most likely be someone from the top contending group of 2008.
That would include the threesome of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, and Senator John McCain's vice presidential candidate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
Governor Huckabee seems to believe his best chance for a successful second run for the White House is to keep his name and image front-and-center by hosting a regular television show on Fox News. Governor Palin is trying to keep her "one of us" image intact with a series of informal interviews also on Fox with Greta Van Susteren and is in the process of writing a book about her life.
Governor Romney is also appearing regularly on the political talk show circuit and is making a few moves that might bode well for him from a public relations standpoint should he decide to run again in 2012. He is selling a five million-dollar vacation home in Utah and downsizing to a smaller house in his home state of Massachusetts.
For sure these potential 2012 presidential candidates are going about the business of staying in the public eye - yet keeping their options open. These aspirants would be wise to take a page from the past - from someone who overcame great odds to balance public exposure and the need to develop a political strategy under the radar screen.
Richard Nixon's comeback was most remarkable, and it set the standard from which others now try to emulate. Following Senator Barry Goldwater's landslide defeat in 1964, Nixon decided the 1968 Republican nomination wouldn't be worth very much if the party could not be rebuild itself in the 1966 congressional elections.
Losing the presidential race in 1960 and the California governors' race in 1962 Nixon had what every politician dreads - a "loser image." Still following Goldwater's defeat, Nixon knew that the party's best interests - and his own - were the same.
With a staff never larger than two Nixon set out to rebuild the party - crisscrossing the country - traveling over 127,000 miles visiting 40 states, speaking before 400 various groups and organizations (there were no speakers' fees back then) all the while focusing on electing Republicans in 1966 and raising money for the party.
In the two months leading up to the 1966 Congressional elections, Nixon quietly campaigned in 82 Congressional districts for Republicans. He noted, "I knew this would be hard, boring, and sometimes thankless work. But this was a job that I increasingly saw as my own".
His efforts were rewarded on election night as Republicans picked up a net of 47 House seats, three Senate seats, 8 governorships and 540 seats in state legislatures. There was no doubt that Nixon had recharged his political career and he would run again for President in 1968.
Just as Rockne - the legendary college football coach - once analyzed - it isn't necessary to see a successful play on the field - one can hear it.
Same with politics.
Robb Austin is a former newspaper reporter and elected Member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and has successfully run numerous Congressional campaigns. Learn more at http://robbaustin.com |  |